Chapter-3

Reconstruction of women as Patriarchal Archetypes in Sangs

In this chapter an attempt will be made to understand the socio-political contours of

folk ethos and stereotypes and their bearing on the construction of women. For the

purpose analysis in this chapter would focus on four mythical and legendary folk

narratives: “Heer Ranjha”, “Hoor Meneka”, “Pooranmal” and “Satyavan Savitri”. The

purpose is to understand how conventional and folk wisdom creates certain

representational moulds to create normative boundaries around characters such as

Heer, Meneka, Loona and Savitri from the vantage point of myth, ideology and

culture. These characters were narrated, sung and popularised by a folk tradition like,

sangs and ragnis. A staple popular entertainment and instructional medium of the

rural masses among other folk bards like Pandit Lakhmi Chand, Mange Ram, Baje

Bhagat and Dhanpat in particular, had played a major role in composing and

improvising, performing and popularising their folk idiom or expression especially in

the later half of 20th century. Besides being contemporaries, these bards were making

their creative and performative forays at a time when the target society was

undergoing a cultural transition1.

The narratives that constitute these archetypes usually emerged from and

embed the core consciousness of their generative context, patriarchy being one of the

most dominant strains of this configuration. This embedding usually manifested itself

as binary gendered conception. This cultural consciousness, a staple of everyday

interaction, found its echoes in any folk narrative that was grounded in and targeted

this cultural milieu. Sangs and ragnis are no exceptions. To illustrate, many such

idioms had found easy access in folk narratives— “chor ne fasave khansi aur chori ne

fasave hansi ”/ „a thief is caught when he coughs, and a girl‟s character is known

69
when she smiles (at a man)‟; “gadhe ki laat aur beer ki jaat ka koi bharosa nhi hota”/

„ a woman‟s nature and a donkey‟s kick can never be trusted‟; “kaam chudailan ka,

mijaaz pariyan ke”/ „a woman does something else and says something else‟. All such

idioms when incorporated into folk narratives and folk conscience get established as

ultimate truths or reductive folk wisdom.

The society of Haryana is configured around patriarchy. The cultural core

finds echoes in the thematic and narrative structures of sangs, ragnis, bhajans, etc.

The issue of female subjectivity is one of the most prominent domains in the

discourse of Haryanvi society where patriarchy has been the governing body. The

control and subordination of women has remained the subject of discussions of not

only of the general discourse but also of the folk narratives like, sangs, ragnis,

bhajans, qissahs and kahavatein (popular sayings) etc. The vast repertoire of popular

sayings is overflowing with one-line puns that hint towards the sexuality and

subjectivity of women at large. E.g. “So ghar ujjad janiye jis ghar tiriya banjh”/ „A

barren woman deserts the whole clan‟. Women are regarded as mere „objects‟ that are

valued only for their labour and reproductive power. Any claim of theirs on their

sexuality and freedom is scorned by patriarchy. But simultaneously, they are also

worshipped in the form of goddesses like Lakshmi, Sita, Sati and the likes. This

approach only makes them divide into the binaries of Good and evil; which is

ultimately propagated and reinforced through various folk manifestations.

In Haryanvi society, power belongs to men, as they are engaged in the

production and sustenance of their families, and have the legitimacy and freedom to

voice their opinion, which they do through the public platforms, like sangs, bhajans

and ragnis. These folk narratives act as a means of producing cultural values, norms

and reigning ideology, and legitimising them as basis for any society to function

70
smoothly. Heer, Meneka, Loona, and Savitri, serve as the archetypes of promiscuity,

dangerous sexuality, adultery, and virtue, respectively. The hagiographical

representation of these women in ragnis is a deliberate act to establish them as

examples of good and bad conduct among the women folk. The present study, in the

light of select folk bards and their narratives, is an attempt to bring forward and

critique on the established patriarchal order and expose the construction of gender

through their narratives. For the convenience, the chapter is divided into four parts: I-

Standard legends and myths and their interpolations by each sangi followed by their

feminist critique; II- Structural frameworks of patriarchy; III- Detailed feminist

critique on the above patriarchal structures; IV- Conclusion.

HEER RANJHA

“Heer Ranjha” is one of the popular legends of Qissah tradition of Punjabi folklore. It

has been sung time and again by many folk poets and people in general. The actual

incident, believed to happen in Punjab (one which is in Pakistan now), has now

become a part of the vast repertoire of the folklore of northern India. “The first

Punjabi poem to narrate the story appears to be that of Damodar Gulati who claims to

have been a contemporary of Akbar, followed by the qissahs of Ahmad Gujjar, a

contemporary of Aurangzeb, and Muqbil, probably a contemporary of Muhammad

Shah” (Deol 143). But it is a well known fact that Waris Shah‟s Heer is one of the

most popular and universally acknowledged versions in the Punjabi folk literature.

Before taking up the task of critiquing the above qissah from various standpoints it is

essential to know the story of “Heer Ranjha” in brief. Keeping in mind the popularity

of the story written by the Punjabi Sufi poet, Waris Shah, I have taken the epic

narrative written by him as a touchstone to compare with, analyse and critique on

71
“Heer Ranjha” in the ragni tradition of Haryana. Below is the brief recapitulation of

the popular version by Waris Shah:

The story, by Waris Shah, starts with Ranjha (his original name was Dheedo)

belonging to village Takhat Hazara situated in Chajj Doab lying between

Rivers Jhelum and Chenab. He is the youngest son of Mauju Chaudhary who

is a big landowner of the village. He is the favourite son due to which his

seven brothers are jealous of him. As ill luck would have it, his father dies that

leaves him at the mercy of his elder brothers‟ wives. Challenged by his sisters-

in-law he leaves his village to win the love of Heer belonging to the village

Jhang Sayal across the river Chenab. On the way to Jhang Sayal, he meets

Five Pirs (sufi saints) who fulfil his wish and tell him that he will win the love

of Heer. He crosses the river and encounters Heer who begins to like him and

inquires about his caste. She takes him to his father and pleads that he be given

some job. Heer‟s father Choochak gives him the job of looking after his

buffaloes, and for twelve years he remains in service. During this period their

love blossoms and becomes the talk of village. Fearing that there would be

problems in Heer‟s marriage in future Choochak arranges her marriage with

Saida who belongs to village Rangpur. Despite the fact that Ranjha belongs to

the same caste of Jat, he is not considered suitable for Heer because of his

present class status.

Heer reaches her husband‟s village, but Saida fails to consummate the

marriage, because of the divine intervention of the five Pirs. Ranjha who had

sworn never to come back to his village without Heer plans to contact her. The

way he finds out is to become a Hindu Yogi. However, he cannot become a

yogi without the approval and blessings off the chief of the math of the yogis.

72
For the purpose he goes to Baba Bal Nath‟s math and persuades him to bless

him as a yogi. Bal Nath gets persuaded and finally makes him a yogi and

advises him to stay away from women or treat them as mothers or sisters.

When Ranjha reveals his real intentions, Bal Nath is shocked and in order to

find a solution to the paradox he enters into trance. The divine power informs

him that Heer belonged to Ranjha and there would be no contradiction if he

pursues Heer as a yogi. Bal Nath opens his eyes and gives him Heer meaning

that he could pursue his goal without any guilt of violating the code of the

yogihood. Now is the time for Ranjha to go to Rangpur to claim his Heer

back. However, he is duly warned on his way to the village that if he reveals

his real identity, he could be killed.

When he reaches Rangpur, the people of the village become curious but

keener to know about the yogi are the young girls. He stays in the village for

some days during which he goes to beg for food to the house of Saida. Here he

encounters the sister-in-law of Heer named Sehti who opines that the yogi is a

fraud. She argues with the yogi and soon it turns into quarrel. The yogi puts

his camp outside the village in the black (barren) garden. Soon his arrival

brings life to the garden. In the meantime Sehti is persuaded to take food to the

yogi as a gesture of compromise. However, she is still hostile to yogi, but

finally witnesses the miracle performed by him with the help of the five Pirs.

She finally surrenders and reveals her secret that she is in love with a man

named Murad who is Bloach. Ranjha also reveals himself and seeks Sehti‟s

help in his goal of having Heer. Heer and Sehti conspire to elope with their

lovers. Though Sehti is able to escape, but the servants of Saida catch Heer

and Ranjha.

73
 There is a new turn here when the matter reaches the king who refers the

case to a maulavi. After hearing all details the conjugal rights of Saida are

restored. Ranjha curses the kingdom and immediately after he does so a fire

breaks out in the city. The king then decides the matter in Ranjha‟s favour.

Finally, Ranjha achieves his goal and now he is free to go back to his village.

Heer insists that they should go to Jhang Sayal to get formally married with

the participation of her parents and his brothers, as she does not want to be

labelled as a mere mistress. Ranjha agrees to do so. When they reach Jhang

Sayal, the family of Heer pretentiously welcomes them and tell Ranjha to

bring the barat to take Heer to his village. With the assurance of the family of

Heer, Ranjha happily reaches his village, Takhat Hazara, and starts preparing

for the marriage. The family of Heer conspires to kill her as they think that it

would be the loss of honour for the family if she is married to their former

servant. Heer‟s uncle Kaidon voluntarily performs the job by poisoning her.

After the death of Heer a messenger goes to Takhat Hazara and informs

Ranjha who after hearing the news of Heer‟s death collapses and dies. (Judge

24-5)

The Representations/Interpolations of Heer in Later commentaries:

The above version is the popular one in qissah “Heer Ranjha” but we see various

interpolations of the above in the sang compositions of Pandit Lakhmi Chand and his

contemporaries, Mange Ram and Dhanpat. There are various points of departure and

many additions done by respective poets to their versions of the legend. Each poet, in

their respective versions, appears to be biased towards Heer from the very beginning.

One can see the regulated gender identity in the treatment of the legend by the later

commentators. Each poet composes his sang from a patriarchal point of view which

74
was paramount in that era. The character of Heer is manipulated in the name of

bringing changes to the original legend. Each interpolation reflects a patriarchal view

point of the respective poets, which I shall comment on besides briefly recapitulating

the legend as narrated by them.

Pandit Lakhmi Chand‟s “Heer Ranjha”:

 It was Heer who dreamt of Ranjha one night, and she called for him to her

home.

 The love affair between Heer and Ranjha is found out by Heer‟s sister-in-

law (brother‟s wife), who confronts Heer on her audacity and

shamelessness.

 Her brother Patmal is the one who takes charge here and fixes her

marriage with a one-eyed man, Akkhan of Atkhera.

 Throughout the sang, Ranjha snubs Heer for marrying another man and

never believes a word of her regarding her helplessness. He expresses his

disbelief in Heer‟s love for him and, all the time, feels deceived.

 Time and again, Heer assures Ranjha of her return and also of her love for

him saying that she considers Akkhan as her brother and would never let

him consummate their ill fated marriage.

 Heer is badly beaten and abused by her Husband Akkhan on the way of

her marriage procession back to her in-laws‟ village.

 Heer is the one who makes a plan to elope with Ranjha.

Mange Ram‟s “Heer Ranjha”:

 The poet hints towards a mutual „love- at- first- sight‟ between Heer and

Ranjha, upon which Ranjha chooses to stay at Jhang Sayal.

75
  Heer‟s father and his younger son Kaido has a liking for Ranjha but Heer‟s

elder brother, Patmal, objects to this relationship. Similar to Lakhmi

Chand‟s version, Patmal and his wife are the ones who take charge of

decisions regarding Heer‟s life.

 Mange Ram‟s Ranjha too is averse of Heer‟s integrity and doubts her love

for him time and again.

 Even in this version, Heer is forcefully married to the one-eyed Akkhan.

 Heer‟s physically abuse at the hands of her husband happens in this

version as well.

 Simillar to Warris Shah‟s Hir, Mange Ram‟s Heer is also helped by her

sister-in-law, Sehti, who takes pity on her and helps her meet Ranjha. But

Mange Ram, no where, cites reasons as to why Sehti takes pity on Heer.

 The poet ends his sang stating that as soon as the two lovers meet in

Heer‟s chamber, the earth explodes and both vanish underneath.

Dhanpat‟s “Heer Ranjha”:

 Dhanpat excludes the meeting of the two lovers and the love ensuing

thereafter. He rather begins his sang with Heer‟s friend Bulli, who informs

Ranjha of his beloved‟s rumoured marriage.

 Dhanpat‟s representation of Ranjha is also no different from the above two

poets. He accuses Heer of being an opportunist who has chosen a one-eyed

man because of his wealth and social standing.

 Dhanpat‟s Heer takes a stand and chooses to say no to this marriage before

the Kazi. Though eventually, she is married against her wishes to Akkhan.

76
  She assures Ranjha of her true love and promises to take Akkhan as her

brother.

 Dhanpat‟s Heer is also seen as a battered wife.

 Sehti, Heer‟s sister-in-law, is the only woman to help her in distress and

arranges for a meeting between the two lovers in Heer‟s chamber.

All the above interpolations of “Heer Ranjha” legend seem biased towards Heer from

the very beginning. The above points of departure suggest the poets‟ focussing more

on Heer‟s character in the legend instead of Ranjha. A close reading of the sang

reveals the presence of patriarchal ideology taking place in formulating the said

character of Heer. All three versions project Heer to be a manipulator, desirous of a

union with her lover. Lakhmi Chand accuses Heer for Ranjha‟s arrival in Jhang Sayal.

Heer‟s dreaming of Ranjha and asking him to come to her village hints towards poet‟s

representation of a tragic flaw in her nature. He hints towards Heer‟s sexual desire

towards a man „whom she has never met before’, which is very strange. Though

Mange Ram‟s narrative talks of a mutual feeling of love initiating between the two,

but even here, Heer gets no respite in the development of the sang. Dhanpat

comfortably excludes the first meeting of Heer and Ranjha and love ensuing after that.

He thinks it better to do without the love part of the legend at all. He rather chooses to

begin his sang with the tension regarding Heer‟s impending marriage, befalling the

two.

All three poets reinforce the belief that a sexually promiscuous girl brings

downfall to her family and justifies it by marrying Heer to a physically handicapped

man (one-eyed Akkhan). Heer is also stereotyped into a battered wife, which is

suggestive of poets‟ rigid ideology of the hierarchy of man over woman. Heer‟s

asserting her sexuality in choosing Ranjha over Akkhan makes her a promiscuous

77
woman who is socially shunned. The legend does not get treated as a „love-lore‟ in

any of the above interpolations; rather, it is represented as a tale of a debauched girl,

having a short stint with a man, when caught, is married to a one-eyed man. The

poets‟ narrative is not without purpose and there is a reason for this change. The idea

is to set the tale as an archetype of debauchery and adultery and thus to control and

regulate the sexuality of all the women in the Haryanvi society. Even Lakhmi Chand‟s

narrative hints toward Heer initiating the plan of elopement which is quite contrary to

Warris Shah‟s narrative. However Dhanpat‟s Heer raises the hopes of the readers,

when she refuses to marry against her wishes. But she too gets emasculated under

patriarchy and can do nothing to save herself. The character of Sehti, Heer‟s sister-in-

law, does get a mention by every poet but none of them divulge into the fact as to why

she takes pity on Heer and helps her out. Because the cultural ideology ruled by men

does not take it as an „appropriate conduct‟ for young girls to have love affairs. Thus

Sehti and her lover never get mentioned in any of the sangs.

Another notable thing in each sang is the abrupt, or say, incomplete ending;

which is again, not without purpose. Where Lakhmi Chand ends with an elopement

planned by Heer, Dhanpat closes with a meeting between the two in Heer‟s chamber.

Mange Ram ends his sang differently where he claims the earth exploding and the

two lovers getting buried inside. There can be various connotations for it one of which

hints toward the murder of both. But in all possibilities, one thing is sure that none of

the poets is willing to take the love legend to its historic ending.

HOOR MENEKA

“Meneka is a well known character in the Meneka-Vishwamitra myth that first

appeared in Bhagavata Purana2. The tale consequently appeared in Ramayana3 and

Mahabharata4. There is no archaic version in the Meneka-Vishwamitra myth to be

78
taken as standard but the popular tradition believes that Meneka was an apsara, a

celestial nymph in Indra‟s court who descended from heaven to prevent Vishwamitra

from practising great austerities to gain supremacy. The power he accumulated grew

so much that all the mighty gods including Indra felt threatened by his might. This led

Indra into hatching a plan to avert Vishwamitra‟s tapas in order to prevent his

unknown fear of getting dethroned. Indra asked Meneka to carry out this task by

enticing him by her beauty and charms. Meneka came down to earth and cohabited

with Vishwamitra for a period of time until she gave birth to a girl (later known as

Shakuntala). Vishwamitra upon realising his folly, left Meneka and the baby, and

went to Himalayas to perform tapas once again. Meneka too abandoned her child and

ascended back to heaven” (Saroha 151).

In the sang tradition, it is only Pandit Lakhmi Chand who has composed and

sung “Hoor Meneka”, among the selected four poets. Though we can find the first few

ragnis dedicated to Meneka and her relationship with Vishwamitra, in the sang

composition, Shakuntala-Dushyanta, by Mange Ram. In his composition, Shakuntala-

Dushyanta, the first nine ragnis briefly narrates how Meneka and Vishwamitra met

which resulted in the birth of Shakuntala. The poet sums up the myth, stating Meneka

abandoning the just born child in the forest and leaving for heaven, only to begin with

the main plot i.e. Shakuntala-Dushyanta.

Pandit Lakhmi Chand‟s sang progresses on the lines similar to the popular

version except for the end, where we see a complete variance. The poet maintains, it

is Vishwamitra who is abandoned by Meneka after she delivers a baby girl and leaves

for heaven leaving the child back to him. But the folk narrative does not come to us in

such simplistic versions as it actually is. A close reading of the text reveals the voice

of patriarchy overshadowing its composition. The representation of Meneka from a

79
divine figure to a secular being domesticated to suit the norms of patriarchy is quite

evident throughout the narrative. Apsaras are known to have no concern for any kind

of earthly relations. They are eternal virgins who have certain powers with them.

Their youth and beauty is never affected by their constant „sporting‟ 5. But Pandit

Lakhmi Chand clads his Meneka in „lajja‟ or „shame‟. He makes it an essential virtue

for every woman, no matter even if she is an apsara, to protect her honour and virtue

from other men. To quote, “Oonch neech hogyi te fir rehti jaat jamat nhi se”/ „a

woman who loses her virtue, holds no social standing‟ (PLC 234). His Meneka is seen

as a powerless woman who beholds virginity as the greatest virtue which should be

protected and taken care of every time. Her constant pleadings to Indra requesting him

to not to send her to seduce the great sage Vishwamitra are obvious to this argument.

After meeting with the sage, she is constantly worried about her loss of honour and

social standing. Her stature as an apsara, who freely, at her own will, enjoys the

sexual union with desired men, is reduced to a common woman of a folk society who

constantly lives under the fear of her modesty being outraged. Prem chowdhry

justifies it when she says:

. . . Ideology of izzat or honour emerges as a gendered notion producing

inequality and hierarchy. Both men and women embody notions of honour,

but differently. The woman is the repository and man is the regulator of this

honour. Therefore, the greatest danger to the ideology of honour comes form

the woman. . . . Honour so posited in a woman is, importantly, located in her

body” (Chowdhry 16).

Pandit Lakhmi Chand‟s Meneka is constantly seen at the mercy of two men-

Indra and Vishwamitra. She, unlike the divine apsaras, does not have any choice to

choose her sexual partner. One of the other notable things that render Pandit Lakhmi

80
Chand‟s Meneka the status of a weak woman is her desire for earthly relationships.

She is constantly seen worried of her pregnancy, and later, the girl child she bears.

Bearing a girl child and lamenting it reflects the ideology of the contemporary rural

masses who considered the birth of a girl as a curse and a liability. It was very

unlikely for apsaras to have any kind of remorse over their children born out of such

liaisons as there are innumerable references from myths where many apsaras give

births to children6.

POORAN MAL

Qissah “Pooranmal” or more popularly known as Qissah Pooran Bhagat is a

Punjabi folk narrative that travelled widely throughout Indian folklore in many

variants7. The legend is believed to be originally composed and sung by 19th century

Punjabi poet Qadaryar, the court poet of the Lahore Sikh Darbar, during the reign of

Maharaja Ranjit Singh. The qissah then travelled widely and many variants of the

same have come up in the last century. But the most popular among them has been the

play Loona (1965) written by Punjabi poet Shiv Kumar Batalvi. In the context of

Haryanvi folklore, qissah “Pooranmal” has been composed and sung by many folk

bards, of whom; Pandit Lakhmi Chand‟s version has gained more popularity. Out of

the four sangis chosen for the present research, it is Baje Bhagat besides Pandit

Lakhmi Chand to have composed and sung “Pooranmal”. Before looking into the

nuances of sang compositions by Pandit Lakhmi Chand and Baje Bhagat, it is

imperative to know the story of Pooranmal. Below is the brief recapitulation of the

narrative, first given by Qadaryar.

There is a local king Salwan [Saleman], whose wife queen Iccharan

[Iccharade] gives birth to a son named Pooran. Following a prophecy the son

is heralded as inauspicious for the king who confines him to a dungeon for

81
 twelve years. The king in his old age marries for a second time a young low-

caste woman Loona. When Pooran comes out of the dungeon, young and

handsome, Loona (Nunade)8 seeks love from him. Pooran spurns her

advances. In order to teach Pooran a lesson, Loona tells the king that Pooran

tried to outrage her modesty. The angry kind orders that Pooran be thrown into

a deep well with his hands and feet chopped. (Kumar 131). The qissah is much

longer but the present study does not require it to go into further details as

most of the action revolves around this part of the story.

The Representations/Interpolations of Loona in later commentaries:

Among the chosen four bards, it is Pandit Lakhmi Chand and Baje Bhagat who have

composed and sung the legend of Pooranmal. Both the bards have resourced the main

plot of their respective narratives from the popular version but not without certain

points of departure and their own additions. Both the narratives corroborate patriarchy

in representing the characters of especially, Pooranmal, his father King Salvan and his

second wife Loona (both are called as Saleman and Nunade respectively by Pandit

Lakhmi Chand). Before commenting on the narratives of both the bards it is necessary

to, first, know the story as composed by the respective poets in their folk operas.

Pandit Lakhmi Chand‟s “Pooranmal”:

 The narrative begins with the king Salvan already married twice. A son

named Pooranmal is born to the first wife, queen Iccharan (called as

Iccharade by the bard).

 The poet abstains from giving any details of the prophecy regarding

Pooranmal‟s inauspiciousness to his parents. After twelve long years of

banishment, Pandit Lakhmi Chand abruptly brings out his Pooranmal and

starts building up his story.

82
  The king is seen suggesting Pooranmal to get married and also mentions

about the prospective brides-to-be. But Pooranmal has avowed to remain a

bachelor throughout his life. He in fact gives copious grounds resisting the

institution of marriage and wishes to maintain celibacy and service to his

parents.

 The rest of the story runs similar to the popular narrative where the king

orders Pooranmal to be killed after Loona falsely implicates Pooranmal of

outraging her modesty.

Baje Bhagat‟s “Pooranmal”:

 The bard justifies King Salvan‟s decision to marry Nunade citing reason

that his first wife Queen Icchrade was unable to give him an heir.

 In the same vein as Pandit Lakhmi Chand, Baje Bhagat too abstains from

giving justification for Pooranmal‟s banishment for twelve long years.

There is only a passing reference to astrologically unfavourable stars

responsible for his banishment.

 Bhagat‟s Pooranmal too rejects all prospective brides-to-be after he returns

back to his kingdom giving ample reasons against institution of marriage.

 The rest of the tale runs similar to the popular narrative with only

difference that Baje Bhagat has composed and sung the qissah to the end

where one finds Queen Nunade repenting for deceit.

The initial tale is only a reference point in a particular time. But when the tale

comes to Haryanvi folk tradition, it is projected as a norm. The original oedipal tale is

reworked in the current qissah. Pooranmal was sent away at a tender age. He was

again pushed out finally to be killed at his father‟s orders (filicide). He refused to

marry which indicates towards his incest for his step mother. The step mother‟s

83
infidelity is nothing but a way to „cover up‟ Pooranmal‟s Oedipus complex because

the “mother-worshipping patriarchy” would never accept the story the other way

round (134). The mother-son incest is often transformed into a son‟s love for his step

mother e.g. Roop Basant9. Pooranmal‟s wish to marry her step mother is transformed

into her step mother‟s wish to marry him. It might be, the son projected his desire

onto the young stepmother, and made her feel guilty of what he actually was. The

poets have taken the conventional image of step mother who is seen as a seductress.

And a seductress always deviates a man from his normal routine or dharma. Here

Loona does the same and she traps her step son to deviate him from his dharma.

SAVITRI

Similar to Meneka the myth of Savitri is one of the many stories from Mahabharata10.

Below is a brief recapitulation of the myth11.

The story goes that the king of Madradesa was childless. He used to perform

japa of gayatri one lac times a day. After a lapse of eighteen years Goddess

Savitri was pleased with him and coming from the sacrificial altar blessed him

with a girl. Subsequently, a beautiful daughter was born to him. The king

named her after Savitri. King Asvapati, expressing his inability to find a

suitable match for Savitri permitted her to seek a husband herself. While she

was going through one of the forests, she saw Satyavan, the son of the king

Daumatsena. Savitri felt in love with the prince at the very first sight. She

returned home and told her father about her choice of a husband. Narada, who

was accidently present there, expressed his apprehensions regarding the choice

of Savitri, as he knew that it was ordained that Satyavan was to die before the

end of one year. But Savitri remained adamant for her choice of husband.

84
 The marriage took place. She went to her in-laws in the forest, where they

lived, and began to serve them. All the year she was praying for the long life

of her husband, but knew that the day would soon come when he would depart

from this world. When the fateful day dawned she woke up early and asked

her in-laws to permit her to accompany her husband to the forest. In the forest,

while Satyavan was cutting wood, he started feeling uneasy and got a severe

headache. He told so to his wife. She knew that the evil moment had come and

she mustered courage to give determined fight to Yama who was there ready

to take away her husband‟s life. She knew that only way to regain the life of

her husband was to please Yama with her talk and persuade him to release her

husband. She follows Yama and the latter offers her three boons. At last,

Savitri, asks him to bless her husband with hundred sons, which Yama

granted, but was not possible without her husband being alive. Yama

impressed, blesses Satyavan with a long life

Pandit Lakhmi Chand is the only poet, among the four, who has composed and sung

the sang Stayavan Savitri. He is the closest to the standard myth in composing his

sang. The way he poignantly expresses the hardships faced by Savitri in first, finding

her husband, and later, in saving him back from Yamaraj, are worth appreciation. But

his folk narrative, like others, is deeply rooted in patriarchy. The whole narrative of

“Satyavan Savitri” is based on normativity and Lakhmi Chand himself becomes the

mediator or an agent of this normativity. There are no variations in the folk version of

the said tale rather the poet reinforces the stereotypes of ideal male and female

through his discourse in the present ragni which shall be critiqued in the current

chapter later.

85
 Thus the above variations and differences in the select four ragnis are not

innocent mutations into the original, or say, standard story. There is a deliberate and

planned cultural ideology and moral judgements that have been propagated through

them. All the tales are projected as normative tales and normativity is always

ideological. The variations in plots, characters, and their relationship to each other,

speak a lot about the purpose of the existing patriarchy behind them. The folk

literature, by changing the settings and mood of the commonly acceptable myth,

propagates and venerates the ideology of the dominant class i.e., men. According to

Marx, “The class which has the means of material production at its disposal, has

control at the same time over the means of mental production, so thereby, generally

speaking, the ideas of those who lack the means of mental production are subject to

it” (Walsh 72). In Haryanvi society, the power belongs to the male members as they

are engaged in the production to sustain their families, and thus, have the legitimacy

and freedom to voice their opinion, which they do through a public platform, like,

sangs, bhajans and ragnis. These folk narratives act as means of producing cultural

values, norms and reigning ideology; and legitimising them as basis for any society to

function smoothly.

II

The present study, in the light of select folk bards- Pandit Lakhmi Chand, Baje

Bhagat, Mange Ram and Dhanpat, and their folk narratives; is an attempt to bring

forward and critique on the established patriarchal order and expose the construction

of gender through their narrative. Thus, the textual study of these narratives throws

light on the basis on which patriarchy establishes and grows itself. They are:

 Kinship, Caste and Religion

 Controlling Female Sexuality

86
  Normative and Moral Boundaries

 Male Gaze

III

Kinship, Caste and Religion

The subordination of women takes place through the powerful instruments like

kinship ties, religious practices and caste, which give shape to social practices

followed by people of a particular cultural group. Gender hierarchy maintained

through kinship ties is the principle feature to make sure of the smooth running of

patriarchy. The purity of women is of prime importance because in it lays the purity

of the caste to which she belongs. Women are the preservers and forbearers of the

familial honour. A woman defying these norms or asserting her independence over

her sexuality is considered to vilify her family. Take for example, in the ragni, “Hoor

Meneka”, god Indra threatens Meneka when she, at once, refuses to sexually entice

Vishwamitra as per his orders. This way, she asserts her choice in choosing or not

choosing her sexual partner. Similarly, in Heer Ranjha, Heer‟s falling in love with a

man who is employed as mere shepherd in her home, is unacceptable to her family,

and especially her brother. Though the lovers belong to the same caste but the current

status of Ranjha does not match with his beloved‟s family. To quote Heer‟s sister-in-

law: “Konya khyal tane izzat ka na oonch-neech ne tole,Ho jyagi badnaam nanad je

iss tariya tu dole”/ You care nothing about our social status, Your lack of honour will

bring shame to you (PLC 316). To this Heer asserts Ranjha‟s belonging to an equally

good family. She says:

Bina bulaya na araha se ke ghar baar nhi uske

Mata pita aur bhai bhabhi ke parivaar nhi uske

87
 Ke beizzat hande se ke ghar mein naar nhi uske

………………………………………………..

Ussa-kussa mat jane Ranjha pali izzat bhari ka

He has not come of his own, and has a family to call his

A mother, father, brothers and sisters, he has everyone in his family

He too has honourable women at his home

Do not mistake him to be a mere shepherd with no self respect (317).

Equality in class status is also a pre-requisite before marrying the daughter into a

family from the same caste. Mere caste compatibility does not make the two families

establish new kinship ties. In Haryana, this is a way of establishing hierarchy in class

ranking order whereby it is considered shameful and menial for a girl‟s family to

marry her into a household much below their social standing. One can clearly see the

above hierarchy being maintained by Heer‟s family when Ranjha (who belongs to the

same caste as Heer‟s) is time and again referred to as “Ranjha Pali” (Ranjha, the

Shepherd). Because of his adopting a profession of a lower caste, he looses the respect

and status earned by his own clansmen. His current profession renders him a position

at the lowest level in caste hierarchy. Moreover, since he is a recluse and a run-away,

it is all the more unacceptable to Heer‟s family to accept him as one of them. To

marry such a man with no social standing, Heer would bring dishonour to not only her

family but to the whole caste.

It is well known that to dishonour a family, it is sufficient to violate the

modesty of their women and thereby violating the honour of the male members of that

household, and in totality, the whole caste. Ranjha‟s claims of having sexual relations

with Heer hint towards this. Addressing Akkhan (Heer‟s husband), he proudly

acknowledges their sexual relations and mocks at Akkhan‟s loss of getting an

88
„unchaste wife‟. He degrades the virtue of Heer by associating her with metaphors

like, “Purana kapda” (an old used cloth); “mel ka pani” (dirty water); “gaar” (mud);

“jhootta khana” (left over meal) etc. He says:

Manne kapda peher purana kar gera ja kurdi per te thaiye

Hatke nya konya hoga chahe so-so dfa dhulaiye

Mere mel ka pani se tu baith gaar mein nahaiye

Bhojan, roti toh manne jeem leyi tu mera jhootta khaiye

She is not more than an old and used cloth thrown away by me

That won‟t turn into a new one, no matter how much you wash it

She is like the used water, no better than a mud for you

She is the food left over by me, which u better partake now (DP 378).

The safeguarding of one‟s caste is also a way to safeguard the prevailing interests of

patriarchy. It is well known that the mixing of two different caste is looked down

upon and offensive in the social setup of Haryana. It is more unacceptable if it

happens between an upper caste woman and a lower caste man. The woman, in this

case, brings dishonour to her whole clan. E.g. in one of the sangs, “Nal Damyanti”, a

bheel (a savage) tries to rape Damyanti but after a tussle, she manages to kill him and

save her virtue. Damyanti‟s sexuality is threatening to her husband‟s status and caste

purity and therefore her union with a low caste man should be prevented at any cost.

Even Savitri conforms to the caste norms when she sets off in search of a husband. It

is only after she learns that Satyavan is not mere forest dweller but a prince from a

royal lineage, she decides to marry him.

Caste plays an equally important role in the reproduction as well. A woman

who begets children from an upper caste male ensures a secure future for them in

society. The upper caste blood makes her offspring enjoy all the privileges associated

89
with the status. In “Hoor Meneka”, Meneka accepts to cohabit with the saint till she

gives birth to his offspring-a baby girl and leaves for heaven. The poet‟s

representation of Meneka shows her as a woman desperate to bear a male child from

the saint. Meneka appears to have been well aware of Vishwamitra‟s royal lineage

and his upper caste. For instance, Meneka says, “ishq karan ka behem aaj kardu

tatkaal muni ke . . . vishey vaasna jaga ke koye jandhu laal muni ke”/ let me make the

rishi fall in love with me, and let me seduce him and bear him a son (PLC 234). As

Prem Chowdhry suggests, “The man‟s caste carried sufficient weightage and

legitimacy . . . which branded children born of such marriages” (48). Whether a

woman marries below her caste or even takes up menial tasks not suited to her caste,

she and her family fear the threat of excommunication from others. In any case, she

must bear the burden and the brunt of her caste onto herself but save it at any cost.

Damyanti, in Nal Damyanti, refuses to live like a maid servant in the palace of Chedi,

where she takes refuge. Even in dire need of shelter and protection, she bluntly

refuses the queen to do menial tasks done by maid servant. She says,

Re mein reh jaungi jaroor, mata ji jo ho meri shart manjoor

Jadey beer mard aram krein va sej na bichhaungi

Sir, mindhi na dhoun paer na dabaungi

Jhootte bassan maanju na aur jhootta na khaungi

I shall stay, O mother, on certain conditions

I shall not make the beddings of other men

I shall not wash anyone‟s hair, neither touch feet

I shall neither clean dirty utensils nor eat leftover food (DP 361).

In the context of women in Haryana, kinship ties, as V.Geetha argues, “are

based on blood and decent on the one hand and marriage on the other” (76). It has

90
become normative for a married woman to give importance to her relationship with

her husband‟s family, and detach all her ties with her natal family. When we talk

about structures of kinship in the context of Haryana; we find it deeply rooted and

entangled into the organisation of the household. The household or a family is the

place where the politics of interplay of relationships takes place in a very tacit

manner. The space, called household, is divided into two spheres- men and women;

where men at large are the forerunners of it. From very early on, the eldest member of

the family has been the patriarch who governs and dictates the other members and his

authority is unquestionable.

There is no question of equality between the two sexes. The male controls the

means of production, and thus, governs the laws of reproduction. The female has no

right over decision making and in the matters related to property. It is the

responsibility of the headman to control his household affairs and land and property

issues. Since he is the breadwinner of the family, he has the control over the family

members, especially the women i.e. mother, wife, sister and daughter. It is important

for the patriarch to make the gender arrangements for the smooth functioning of the

household. These gender arrangements create male and female identities in the

process. For example, the relationship between brother- sister and father and daughter

are viewed to be most important from the psychological and sociological perspective.

A daughter is raised with a belief that one day she has to leave for her „actual

home‟ once she reaches the marriageable age. It is assumed that it is a father‟s

responsibility to get his daughter married in a good family and to a suitable man. As

the saying, popular in north India, suggests: “karja bhala na baap ka, beti bhali na

ek”/‟a father with a loan, and an unmarried daughter, is surely in deep waters‟. A

father thus makes all arrangements for his daughter‟s wedding and arranges for a

91
decent stridhana to be given to her in form of jewellery, clothes and gifts. On the

other hand, a brother assumes, and takes on, the responsibility of protecting the

honour and virtue of his sister. In the northern Indian society, and especially of

Haryana, these norms and customs are religiously followed. A girl is raised to believe

that the onus of her family‟s honour lies in her being virtuous, chaste and obedient.

The folklore seconds these prevalent ideologies and propagates them through

folksongs, folk stories, proverbs, riddles, anecdotes, sayings etc. It is evident when

Heer‟s sister-in-law finds out about her affair with Ranjha, and she say: “bhai tera

nawab pagdi tanne uteri se” /„you have brought down the status of your brother‟ (DP

372). And also in:

Behen beti raha kre se apne kayde dhang mein

………………………………………………..

Jo bekar firein badnaam ve hori se akna

…………………………………………

Nu te mere jachgi tu badnaam kregi dera

Young girls should maintain the decorum

Those who venture out, earn a bad name

I am sure you are going to bring bad name to the family. (PLC 316)

The emasculation of women under caste hierarchy is most bore by those who have no

kinship ties to support them. The folklore maintains and propagates this ideology and

we see reflections of it in the given ragnis as well. The low caste woman or a woman

as a single born child and no other male heir to her father in her natal family, are

devalued and subjugated all the more. She is made to terminate all kinds of kinship

ties with her family after marriage, which takes away all the support she might get in

need. She is vulnerable, though, being the sole owner of her natal property, but, her

92
kinship ties are subject to suspicion. It is all the more unfortunate if it becomes hard

for her parents to find a suitable match for her. Since the importance of a male

benefactor is stressed in the society, it becomes necessary for her parents to marry her

into a suitable family. sang, “Satyavan Savitri” propagates this ideology where in king

Ashvapati‟s wife (Savitri‟s father), raises her concerns regarding her daughter‟s

marriage:

Jagat mein kanyadaan te badh ke, aur nhi koye daan se

De beti ne fere, nhi te hasenge jagat ke log

To give one‟s daughter in kanyadaan is the highest charity

To avoid being mocked at, one should marry his daughter in time (501)

Savitri is the only child of her father, thus, it becomes all the more important for him

to marry her in time. But when there are women who have no kinship to support them,

they become all the more vulnerable to other men. They are subjugated to sexual

exploitation under patriarchy. Meneka is one such woman who is under male

suppression from each man she encounters in her life. Firstly, she is forced by Indra to

entice Vishwamitra, and secondly, Vishwamitra upon finding her alone with no natal

network to call for, forces her to cohabit with her. He says:

Kaun desh te aave challi, aage kit ja se

……………………………………………..

Kaun kiski manne nhi pichani . . .

. . . kaun malik pati bhup tera se

. . . kari tapsaya bhang kardi meri kitne saal ki

Nhi dat ti te shraap tanne du fire mari-mari.

From where have you come, where will you go further?

Whom you belong to?

93
 Who is your owner, your husband?

You have disturbed me in my penance

Now if you do not cohabit with me, I will curse you (236-39).

Such a woman, as Meneka, who has no kinship ties, is doubly suppressed in

patriarchy. She becomes a vulnerable tool in the hands of patriarchy where any man

can claim her and force her to cohabit with him. She can not ask for a “legally

wedded” relationship to secure herself. Through Meneka the poet reinforces the

stereotype of a woman with no kinship ties and male protection who is sexually

available and morally degraded. She is regarded nothing more than a concubine.

Bearing of a child and that too girl did nothing to provide her sustainable kinship ties

because a girl is regarded nothing more than a liability. Had she given birth to a son,

the sage might have taken her as his legal wife. The prevalent ideology is clearly

voiced in the sang when the poet says:

Zindagi bhar ka gala ho gya, sab tariya muh kala ho gya

Ladki ho gyi chala ho gya ke karma chahiye

………………………………………………

Ladki kaise pali posi jai ibb ke karma chahiye.

My life is now ruined; it has brought me shame from everywhere

The girl is a disgrace. What should I do?

…………………………………………

How to bring up a girl? What should I do? (241).

Even after bearing a girl child from the great sage, she is unable to sustain her ties

with either of the two- the sage and her child. She abandons her into the forest and

Vishwamitra too is not keen to take the child under his custody. He says:

94
 Ek kanya dayi chhod bilakhti, sir pe dhar k bhar chali gyi

……………………………………………………………

Sir apna aur bojh birana dhovta firu

She has left me with the responsibility of this girl

I am now taking care of someone else‟s burden (243).

The legitimacy of the children born out of such unrecognised and socially

unacceptable alliances comes into question. The children born thus are considered

illegitimate and the conjugal status of the couple is challenged. It also brings into

question the caste of the children born through such sexual alliances. As V.Geetha

argues, “Thus, a bearer of male children is automatically valued over one who has

only borne female children. . .” (70-71).

The patriarchal kinship, as it appears, is not always appreciated by women.

Such relations sometimes prove suffocating and cruel to the women emasculating

under them. The kinship ties, as discussed above, are sometimes made obvious to the

women and at other times, forced upon them through violence. E.g. Heer‟s brother

does not approve of her relation with Ranjha and therefore she is forced to marry

someone else. She time and again voices the ongoing torture- physical and mental-

upon herself in the ragnis when she says,

Dhingtane te baitha dayi mein baan patmal ne

Dukhi kri aur peeti su beimaan patmal ne

…………………………………………..

Meri baat ne kaun sune chalti gharkyan ki

Isme mera khot nhi se galti gharkyan ki

Patmal is forcefully marrying me off to someone

The scoundrel Patmal has tortured and beaten me

95
 Nobody listens to me and does what they deem fit

It‟s not my fault but that of my family (PLC 321-22).

Meneka is also forced to seduce Vishwamitra on Indra‟s behest which is again a form

of violence towards a woman condescending under patriarchal kinship. She is aware

of the consequences to be faced in case of her failure to accomplish the task. She says:

Fir sochan lagi Meneka, karu Indra ka kaam

Nhi te Indra mane de saza, aur ho jaungi badnaam

Meneka contemplated, “I should do as Indra wishes”

“Or else Indra would punish me, and my reputation be ruined” (234).

Religion is another weapon in the hands of men to exercise their control over

women and regulate their sexuality through it. The nature of religion is didactic as

Jasbir Jain argues:

The philosophy and ideology underlying the social function of these narratives

is reflected in the manner in which they are structured and the significant

tropes which are employed for purposes of employment. They are intended to

inculcate discipline, virtue and rules of moral behaviour but simultaneously

work to reinforce patriarchal authority by re-inscribing feminine subordination

(95).

Sangs and ragnis are rich in propagating such ideologies as they are affluent in

mythological, legendry and religious tales and anecdotes to support them. In “Savitri

Satyavan”, king Asvapati, undergoes the ritual of „havan‟ and revives the God in

order to be blessed with male heir but has to be contended with a girl child, Savitri.

The poet stresses on the marriage of Savitri as the only way for her father to achieve

moksha. The ideology of kanyadan (in case of Savitri and Damyanti) is stressed to

earn merit by father, to be achieved after his death. Religious practices and rituals like

96
a wife‟s devoted act to a particular god are all directed towards the well being of her

husband and her children. Her religious obedience is directly linked to her obedience

to her male benefactor and her constant obedience to the customs and rituals will lead

to peace and harmony in the lives of her husband and his progeny. The rituals thus

followed emphasis and propagate the qualities of a pativrata, which is the ultimate

quality of a virtuous woman.

Where women are bound to follow rituals for the well being of their superior

counterpart, men do not have the same reasons to do so. A man practicing tapa of

yoga is again a ritual but it is not practiced to benefit a woman or her interests. Rather

it is done to strengthen one‟s body and achieve self control and discipline in case of

defence against a sexually dangerous and misleading woman. As it is always believed

that a yogic meditation is made powerless by the interference of a woman, as in the

case of Meneka seducing the sage Vishwamitra. The woman, a femme fatale in this

regard, is a threat to men practising great austerities.

Controlling Female Sexuality

Patriarchy works on binaries of men and women. It never operates in isolation rather

it feeds on the oppression of women. The oppression is done to restrict and control

their sexuality which is taken as a threat to male dominance. The male sets

boundaries- physical, social, ideological and psychological- to control the woman and

her sexuality, which when channelized into normativity, help to maintain male

hierarchal order. What Vishwamitra does to Meneka is an apt example of the above

argument. In the sang “Hoor Meneka”, Vishwamitra finds a bewitching force like

Meneka, free from every kind of male control, alone in the forest. He at once decides

to tame her to domesticity, bears her a child, and leaves her later on. He turns her

from an enticing apsara into an ordinary woman.

97
 The reason why men seem to be keen on controlling female sexuality is that

they believe that women would create havoc if not tamed and controlled. A woman in

control of her own sexuality appears to be dangerous for the patriarchal order. It is

believed that they have an insatiable hunger for sexual pleasures which, if not

channelized into ideological norms of marriage and reproduction, would create chaos

to the social order. To achieve this purpose, men set archetypes of ideal womanhood,

derived from myths and other folk narratives, to condition women into these images.

As Susan S. Wadley remarks in this context, “The benevolent goddesses in the Hindu

pantheon are precisely those who transferred control of their sexuality (power/nature)

to their husbands. The mythology is replete with stories of the properly chaste wife

who helps her husband win battles by giving him her power. . .” (116). The

archetypes of ideal womanhood propagate the characteristics of femininity, i.e. a

chaste wife and a devoted mother. Pandit Lakhmi Chand and his contemporaries

reinforce these ideals through their discourse and make it obvious that it is important

for a woman to focus on the ideology of pativrata and motherhood which ultimately

decide her social position and fulfilment in her life, or lack of it. For example, in

“Satyavan Savitri”, the poet reinforces the belief through the mouthpiece of Savitri:

Mein dekhti hi reh gyi tum le chle the Satyavan ko

Ye to mein bhi janti hu ghar bigadte hai fook se

De diya vardaan ho sau putra maa ki kokh se

Na te daag lag jata meri iss chandrma si shyan ko

I could do nothing when you took Satyavan‟s life

Husband‟s death brings doom to the family

You blessed me with hundred sons

Otherwise I would have been cursed forever (PLC 524).

98
Savitri is conforming to male authority here. She shows her dependency on man and

accepts that in the event of her husband‟s death, she can not bear him his offspring.

She glorifies the ideology of motherhood and that too the normative one where one

begets progeny only within a legitimate matrimonial alliance. Her motherhood is not

like Meneka‟s motherhood which is symbolic of stigma and shame because she bears

a daughter out of wedlock. So, somewhere Savitri is conforming to her stri dharma of

being a pativrata woman. Her sexuality is channelized into a legitimate way of

reproduction controlled by men.

In “Pooranmal” as well, the control mechanism for female sexuality is Pooran‟s

own mother where as Loona is seen as a new rebellious woman who celebrates her

sexuality. But her celebration is portrayed as negative. She tosses her pativrata dhrama

and makes sexual advances towards Pooran. But the patriarchal discourse controls her

sexuality by giving itself a very high moralistic stand. Pooran does not give in to her

demands even when she threatens him to be killed. The gender politics here is clearly

evident. The male gives a clear message that no matter how challenging it would be, it is

impossible to penetrate their moral core which is in itself empowered and strengthened,

which women can never own. That is why; ultimately Loona too goes to repentance. The

image of a step-mother is quite conventional here. She is seen as a seductress who always

deviate men from their path of dharma or duty. As per convention, such a woman is bad

with all the attributes of being conniving and scheming. Loona makes her sexuality a

medium to empower herself over the male. But Pooranmal, because of his „high morals‟

does not act like Vishwamitra. He does not fall a pray to his libido and refuses to be cow

down by her sexuality. He truly exemplifies the image of a satpurusha (an ideal man)

which Vishwamitra, in spite of being a renowned sage, falls short of.

99
 The norm of marriage is again a way of controlling the sexuality of woman.

The marriage brings the control of women into the hands of men. Her sexuality is

reserved for a single man and that too the husband, who then exploits it to reproduce

his offspring. But the matrimonial alliance must also be sanctioned by the society i.e.

arranged by the two families taking into cognisance things like caste, socio-economic

status, and lineage etc. A love marriage is considered a taboo and calls for staking

one‟s honour and pride especially in a rural society where caste, clan and social

standing is given more importance than the individual himself. Haryana and its

neighbouring states uphold this honour in high esteem so much so that, many a times

the families of couples supporting them are even shunned and outcaste12.

Savitri is projected as a role model by Lakhmi Chand and his contemporaries

because she conforms to male authority by marrying by her father‟s consent, thus,

transferring her sexuality to a male, where as Heer, by falling in love, take charge of

her sexuality. But unlike sufiana love narratives, where the lovers are on equal plain,

the present love narrative “Heer Ranjha” is mainly male dominated and Heer has a

secondary position throughout. There is a constant effort by Ranjha to gain control

and supremacy over Heer in this love narrative. And the control is not only through

physical abuse but also verbally. The beloved here is addressed in idioms like lugai,

(lag- ayi- sath lag ke ayi) which means one who is dependent. So it is explicit here

that, firstly, the heightened sense of romanticism that one finds in Punjabi narrative of

“Heer Ranjha” is not found here. It is de-emptied of that romance. Secondly, the folk

bards have brought their Heer on a very secular plain. And when one brings a woman

on a mundane plain then the equation of gender predominance and patriarchy comes

to forefront.

100
 Kadd lon thehre btade sach lugai kane ki

For how long will you stay with your one-eyed husband? (331).

Ranjha is addressing Heer in a very demeaning way, which is also a reflection on her

character as a woman of loose moral, begetting a loose husband. So on one hand, this

in one way reflects societal judgement (that such a woman of loose moral should get a

physically disabled husband), and on the other, at individual level, it is the injustice

that she has heaped on him and its her deserving destination that she got a one-eyed

man as her husband. It is again a power play of genders where Ranjha is trying to

control Heer through his patriarchal discourse. And even after all these accusations

and demeaning words Ranjha is expecting certain truth from Heer when he says,

btade sach (“speak the truth”). He is himself damning her and still expecting her to be

the carrier of truth. This becomes a very ironic juxtaposition here, which is to be

negotiated by every woman emasculating under patriarchy.

The dichotomy of Heer is quite evident through the discourse of Ranjha. At

one side she has to be a model of good conduct and virtuosity and on the other side,

she has to be a rebel. Ranjha is trying to find both the things in her at the same time.

And a woman keeps on negotiating this expectation. So, an opposing pull, one

cultural and the other, expectation of the lover, is to be met by her simultaneously.

Mein bhi dekhu baat kahe se kis din aane ki

I am waiting for the day when you will come to me (331).

Through his discourse, Ranjha puts it before her as a challenge to be taken by her. The

whole conversation is in the mode of challenge. He further accuses her saying:

Tanne meri naad katke dhar di, issi kyu ban gi bedardi

Beimaan tanne kardi moti kaar ulhane ki

You have compromised with my honour, how can you be so cruel?

101
 You are dishonest and would bring bad name to me (331).

Normative and Moral Boundaries:

As in everyday parlance, the narrative structure of ragnis and sangs are also seen

overflowing with phrases like, bade-badere keh gye/ “elders used to say”, sant-jan

keh gye/ “great sages used to say”, satpurusho ki kahi/ “as ideal men said”, etc., to

eulogise, validate and legitimise an action or a situation and make it a norm for the

rest to be followed without questioning. In all the narratives, one thing common is the

coming together of narrative structure with normative morality. Narrative structure

closely overlaps with normative morality and their spring board is gender and

patriarchy. The composer, from the position and space of authority, passes moral

judgements and reinforces them into norms. The author himself becomes the

mediator, an agent of normativity. In the present study all the narrative works on

binaries of Man and Woman. The idioms are carefully chosen to, on one hand, glorify

manliness and on the other, to represent the women into fixed categories of „good

women‟ and „bad women‟.

Man Women

(Norm) (Deviance)

Jati (Yamraj, Pooranmal) Sati (Savitri)

Satpurush (Satyavan) Triya (Loona, Meneka, Heer)

Pir, Yogi (Ranjha) Dayan (Heer)

For Example in “Satyavan Savitri”, Savitri‟s conduct is propagated as a model

code of conduct when Yamraj blesses her with her desired boon and tells her:

Ichcha puri hoja teri, sab duniya ko gyan ho jaa

Sant jano ki sharan mein aake, moorkh bhi vidvaan hojya

Hope this boon (norm) becomes an epistemic model!!

102
 May the fools (women) be learned ones in the company of ideal men (523).

Savitri, an ideal wife, dedicated to the well being of her husband, becomes an

archetype of ideal womanhood and through Yamraj, the poet wishes this womanly

conduct to become the form of knowledge for the rest of the world. What Yamraj, a

male himself, will sanction, becomes normative. The poet himself is rooted in

patriarchal culture. He, instead of subverting this image of ideal womanhood, is

reinforcing it. And it is always there that women keep on negotiating themselves in

these categories of „good‟ and „bad‟ which essentially come out of male discourses,

either in general or through folk forms like ragnis, bhajans, sangs, kathas etc. The

male discourse propagates hetronormativity and legitimises it with archetypes of ideal

womanhood. To achieve this purpose, the poet also brings religion and patriarchy on

an equal pedestal. For example in the above sang the poet again says:

Bade sant jan issi dharm ko sanatan kahya krein

Bohot se anjaan dharm virodh kar bhool mein rehya krein

Great sages since ages have called this, Sanatana Dharma

Many other dharmas have ruined themselves by opposing it (523).

The poet talks of Sanatan Dharma here, which is based on gender inequality13.

Religion is a permanent phenomenon and patriarchal norms and values are also like

religion i.e. permanent. Religion lays down the norms which patriarchy follows and

these norms get in seep into the society and go on forever. So patriarchy finds its

legitimacy from religious idioms. Through anjaan dharma the poet hints towards the

ideological beliefs of women which according to him are nothing but a mistake, a

bhool, or more broadly a deviance from the patriarchal norms. And it is only with the

constant guidance of bade sant jan (ideal men, including poet himself) that the other

anjaan dharma will redeem themselves of their sins.

103
 The narrative normative structure also builds the archetypes of ideal male

through its discourse. The ideal male is believed to be one who is jati, a man of

character and has the control over his senses. In “Satyavan Savitri”, Yamraj is an ideal

man because he punishes the wrong doers and blesses the fair ones. When he takes

away Satyavan‟s life and Savitri convinces him to bring back her husband‟s life, she

enumerates the attributes of an ideal man through her discourse. She says:

He prabhu apse dand pake praja bhi shudh ho jati

Dand deke sukarm ka fal do fer shubh gahri ati

Isliye maharaj apko praja Yamraj btati

O Lord! Your subjects (women) are purified by your punishment

You punish and bless us for our bad and good deeds equally

That is why we all know you as Yamraj- the righteous one (522).

Yamraj is an archetype of ideal male who has the right to punish the wrong

doing female or test her for her virtue and dedication to her husband. Normativity is

being defined in the form of test and passing the test. Yamraj is an ethical male who

by virtue of being a male is a norm in himself. And if a male punishes a female, then

norm as a standard will leave no space or scope for deviance (female). Savitri is here

accepting male authority and his violence inflicted upon women as normative. Savitri

seeks to achieve those high moral standards which an ideal male inherits while

seeking blessings from Yamraj. She says:

Ek choti si arj meri jo mere man ko bhati

Man vachan karm se bura na soche chahe koi bhi prani ho

I have this one request to you

No one, including me should bring evil in thought, word and deed (523).

104
Savitri here invokes the cardinal virtues of Hinduism which forms the tripod of one‟s

ethics- Mansa Vacha Karmana/ (“truth in though, word and deed”). The poet has in a

way assumed this tripod to be a male endowment- the attributes of an ideal male. And

Savitri is the seeker of these virtues and ready to give all tests to prove her a sati and

get the desired results from Yamraj. In doing so she has to meet those male standards.

This whole argument by Savitri is nothing but an attempt to prove herself what she is

i.e. a consistent character from her Mann, Vachna and Karma. And because of these

qualities in her, Yama is pleased with her and says:

Savitri tere vachan manne likhe hirde beech

Jitney bol nikalte mukh se ek te ek khare

O Savitri! I keep your words in my heart forever

Everything you utter is as pure as gold (523).

Thus, until she speaks in the normative patriarchal idiom, she is not accepted.

Yamraj tests her time and again and Savitri‟s speaking in male patriarchal discourse is

also a way to prove that there is no difference in her thought, word and deed. And as a

satpurusha, Yamraj is trying to preach and reinforce the normative models of ideal

man which is a directive to female for which she must constantly thrive to achieve.

In “Heer Ranjha”, Heer is a new rebellious woman who breaks the norms and falls for

her tragic end. The poet through the image of Heer, projects a woman of loose morals

who is a threat to male normativity of ideal manliness. One can find abundant

normative idioms which categorises Heer as a sexually promiscuous woman who

transgresses norms when she steps out at midnight to meet Ranjha. Her sister-in-law

confronts her saying:

Kamdev ki tere gaat mein kali naag ladi se

Adhi raat uthke chali moh ki aag chidi se

105
 You seem to be possessed by Kamdev‟s snakes

Governed by passionate fire, you cross the threshold (316).

Her sexuality is defined in terms like, kala nag/ (“black cobra”), moh/ (“passion”),

raat/ (“night”), aag/ (“fire”); which label her as a sexually promiscuous woman

governed by physical love. Unlike Warris Shah‟s Hir, the folktale narrated by Pandit

Lakhmi Chand and others, is more predominated by Ishq Haqiqi. And as soon as

haqiqi i.e. love of man to man (woman) comes to forefront, the gender equations

come to play. The spiritual love is overpowered by physical love. The bards too,

because of their roots and conditioning in Haryanvi rural culture, project it as an

earthly love affair. The following couplet aptly defines the above argument:

Sab jane se prem ke bus duniyadari se

Banke mirage liye khooshboo teri keshar kyari se

It is well known that love is nothing but worldly pleasure

O Ranjha! Savour me like a deer relishes saffron plants (320).

The poet too acknowledges and reinforces true love as nothing but illusion. He

trivialises their love as purely sexual passion because Heer and Ranjha‟s love is not

sanctioned by social norms of matrimony. One might argue that even in sufiana love

narratives, couples are found accusing and blaming each other, which is being done

here in the given sang as well. But Pandit Lakhmi Chand and other bards have

customised it in Haryanvi culture to make it suitable for the general taste of people

here, where beloved is addressed in pejoratives like, dayan/ (“witch”), maya/

(“enchantress”), chali/ (“cunning”), ghaal/ (“murderess”), kane ki lugai/ (“wife of

one-eyed man”) etc. the whole narrative of “Heer Ranjha” is in the mode of defiance,

and defiance is on the part of Heer. The poet gives full freedom and space to Ranjha

to save him of any embarrassment caused by such „superficial love‟. After Heer sets

106
off to her in-laws, Ranjha stops her doli on the way, not to confess her true feelings

for his beloved. He rather begs her to „clear him of infamy‟ caused by this fatal love

affair. He says:

Meri pakki kabar china ke apne hathan te dafnade

Duniya sheesh jhukaya kregi bus mera itna kaam bnade

Bury me with your own hands and build a grave in my memory

I wish people pay me respect even after I die (325).

Ranjha‟s wish is not to die out of separation caused by Heer‟s marriage. He is

rather worried about his image in society and his social standing thereafter. He wants

himself to be engraved in tradition of respectable men and not counted among those

who lost themselves at the hands of triya. Ranjha is therefore, struggling to keep up

with patriarchal normativity of manliness. The poet is acting as his alibi in the whole

narrative when he defines Ranjha in idioms like, Pir and Yogi where as Heer is termed

as Maya and Chali.

The poet further gives references to prove the narrative of “Heer Ranjha” to be

a norm breaking tale. For this purpose he goes to the length of inverting the tradition

of other sufiana love legends to suit his argument. And to achieve this, Ranjha, once

again becomes his mouthpiece when he says:

Laila karan Majnu ne bhi leni padi fakiri

Ashik ban Farhaad katal hua jaan samjh li Shiri

Heer ke karan Ranjhe ne bhi leni padi fakiri

Manju became a beggar because of his love for Laila

Farhad lost his life when he fell for Shiri

Now Ranjha is also a beggar because of Heer (327).

107
 The poet asserts that the reason behind the downfall of ideal male is always a

woman. A defiant woman, a triya, who is in control of her own sexuality, is a threat to

male normativity. And he supports it by giving references from past and twisting them

to suit his needs. The same thing happens in “Hoor Meneka”, where at the end, the

poet puts all the blame on Meneka for Vishwamitra‟s downfall. Vishwamitra‟s

narrative shows him to be repenting for being „enchanted by a seductress‟ and

„abandoned‟ by her thereafter. He says:

Kisse deen ka na chhodya mein, dharti ke manne maar chali gyi

…………………………………………………………………..

Hari bhajan mein baitha tha, mera dhyan digaya akar ke

You have compromised with my honour and ruined me

You came to disturbed me in my penance (242).

In “Pooranmal”, the protagonist Pooranmal is norm in him and Loona is a threat to

that normativity of manliness. The whole qissah is sung in normativity and woman as

the one trying to break it.

Male Gaze

“The most prominent way of establishing patriarchal control over women is through

“male gaze”. Women are “playable entity” which can be constantly supervised,

controlled, constructed, moulded and represented through a surveying male gaze. The

gaze is omnipresent in the women‟s lives and does not require them to be physically

watched on. They become the obvious spectacle of the male voyeuristic pleasure.

Ragni is a male narrative, composed, sung and consumed by men folk. It is therefore a

male discourse and with a female subject in his hands, thus involves „male gaze‟ in

representing the women characters” (Saroha 155-6).

108
 There is an abundance of male voyeurism present in the sangs and ragnis

which gives not only to the audience, but also to the poet himself, the titillating

pleasure in looking or visualising women as objects of sexual pleasure. The gaze

operates at three different levels in these folk narratives- Physical, Psychological and

Hegemonised. The physical gaze is when a man looks at a woman in a certain way

that his sexual desire towards her is conveyed. The folk bards give a head to toe

description of the heroines which reminds us of Nakh-Shikh14 tradition of poetry in

Riti Kal. The nakh-shikh tradition represents “a nayika‟s body as the embodiment of

power” (Sharma 17). But the surveying male gaze of the poet in sangs and ragnis

describes the beauty of the woman in the form of an object to be consumed by men-

folk. It is nothing but a way of legitimising the voyeurism of the poet as well as the

audience. On one hand, Pandit Lakhmi Chand and his contemporaries visualise the

beauty of Heer, Meneka, Loona and Savitri in idioms like hans (“swan”), murgai

(“hen”), pari (“fairy”), mor (“peahen”), koyal (“cookoo”) etc. and on the other, they

also use idioms like, Kela-si (“banana like), keshar kyari (plot of saffron), sharbat

(“juice”) etc. which commodify a woman‟s body into an eatable. The idioms so

chosen are suggestive of suppressed male sexual desire vented out through poetry

which was otherwise a taboo to be expressed openly. In short, it was a way for the

poet, the audience and the male characters to convey their sexual desires. The male

gaze so conveyed through the use of such imagery not only objectified the female but

also enwrapped her into stereotypes of femininity.

In her phenomenal essay, “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”, the

feminist film theorist Laura Mulvey identifies three types of „looking‟: first, look of

the camera, second, look of the character to each other, and last, look of the audience.

She says:

109
 In a world ordered by sexual imbalance, pleasure in looking has been split

between active/male and passive/female. The determining male gaze projects

its fantasy onto the female figure which is styled accordingly. In their

traditional exhibitionist role women are simultaneously looked at and

displayed, with their appearance coded for strong visual and erotic impact so

they can be said to connote to-be-looked-at-ness (emphasis original) (197

Sullivan).

If we study the male gaze present in sangs and ragnis, we find that the theory

operates here as well in similar way except the look of the camera which is

representative of the look of the composer and singer. The look of the singer as

discussed already is when the poet vents out his sexual desire through his description

of the bodily virtues of his heroine. This falls under the category of physical gaze. But

the other two looks, the look of the characters to each other (male-female and female-

male), and look of the audience involves a psychological gaze. The male character

looking at the female character is not always physical. It has deeper psychological

implications to it. For example, in “Satyavan Savitri”, as soon as Yamraj realises the

folly of his hasty decision in blessing Savitri with a son he rues and accuses her

saying “pehlam te manne pata nhi tha, tera dharma kapat ka jaal hogya/ “I wasn‟t

aware of the trap of dharma that you laid down to save your husband” (PLC 524).

Yamraj‟s complain to Savitri for „using‟ her stridharma to get back her husband‟s life

is viewed as kapat (“fraud”) on her part. When a pativrata woman like Savitri follows

her dharma it is seen as a trap. The male looks at her stridharma not as her inherent

quality but a strategy, triya-charitra from a straight forward woman like her. It is a

way of psychologically looking at a woman from a certain perspective or image

which is a result of cultural conditioning. Ranjha‟s way of looking at Heer, in “Heer

110
Ranjha”, is also reflective of his attitude towards women in general which is

obviously demeaning. Ranjha addresses her in derogatory idioms like, dayan

(“witch”), ghal (“death”), dasi (“maid”), kane ki lugai (“wife of one-eyed”), chali

(“cunning”) etc. which are not used to address one‟s beloved generally. The gaze is

not only of the poet and the male characters towards the female character, but also, of

the audience towards women, both fictional and real.

Other than the physical and psychological aspects, the male gaze has its own

dynamics. It operates differently for different women. The psychological gaze of men

categorises women into binaries of „good‟ and „bad‟. The male gaze becomes

different for a seductress and different for a wife. The representations of Heer,

Meneka and Loona are different from those of Savitri‟s. Whenever the poets talk

about the former women characters, the idiom changes to that of ridicule and it turns

abusive and audacious. The poet introduces Meneka to the audience through a

narrative that already labels her a sexually promiscuous woman with a proclivity for

„innocent males‟. He says:

Sajj dhajj ke kela si hale

. . . dhyan digavan khatir chale

. . . ek minute mein bharma legi, chhode konya syana karke

. . . triya charitra issa faila diya tircha ghoonghat karke

She adorns herself and lustfully makes moves like a banana

She walks to seek male attention

She will entice a man in no time and robe him of his innocence

She enticed him with her cock-eyed veil (227-35).

Whereas the idiom used for Savitri is counteract to that of Meneka‟s. She is described

by the poet in idioms that already raises her stature to that of an ideal woman:

111
 Lakshmi kesa dev kanya ke pade roop ka saya . . .

. . . mata pita se ashish liya sabka adarman kiya

. . . apne pita ki jad mein ja ke

Lajjit si baith gyi asan lake, mukh se nhi bayan kiya

She was blessed with beauty like goddess Lakshmi

She sought the blessings of her parents and elders

In all her modesty with her eyes cast down, she sat beside her father

And did not even utter a single word (500).

The above two excerpts from sangs, “Hoor Meneka” and “Satyavan Savitri” describe

the two women in contrasting idioms. Where on one hand, Meneka is branded as

triya, Savitri on the other, is glorified as dev kanya (godly nymph). In fact the poet

defines the code of conduct of the two women with certain phrases that label and

categorise them as either morally corrupt or ideal. Where Meneka is the one who

dhyan digavan khatir chale/ „walks to seek male attention‟ and kela si hale/ „lustfully

makes moves‟; Savitri, an embodiment of virtuosity, moves only to seek the blessings

of her parents. The gaze of the two women is again a strategy of the poet to establish

both of them as archetypes of promiscuity and virtuosity. Where Meneka „looks at‟

the sage Vishwamitra with a tircha ghoonghat/ „cock-eyed veil‟, Savitri casts her eyes

downward with modesty and displays lajja/ „shame‟ as her prime virtue.

Savitri further exemplifies this „virtue‟ in her narrative where she submits to

her husband saying, “thari agya bina uper ne mein nain nhi kar sakti/ „I can not raise

my eyes to you without your permission‟” (515). Here Savitri is in complete surrender

to male authority and is seeking permission behave according to male normativity.

She is seeking permission for things which are not norms because there is no need for

a permission for a normative act which here means, to raise one‟s (woman) eyes. And

112
raising one‟s eyes is suggestive of deviance. Savitri is seeking permission to match

her gaze or to „gaze back‟ to the male gaze (of her husband) present here. “Women

were effectively prevented from gazing back . . . confirmed the naturalness of their

passivity and the rightness of their objectification” (Waterhouse 108). So, though

there is no direct male gaze present here but it will become active as soon as Savitri

raises her eyes. In a way, male gaze is circumscribing the whole of her conduct. “The

guarded respectability of the body could be soiled by mere visual contact, for seeing

was bound up with knowing” (113). Meneka too activates Vishwamitra‟s male gaze

but that gaze is of seduction because in his mind the image of Meneka is not that of a

Sati Savitri but of a woman of loose moral character. He can be licentious there and

Meneka takes advantage of that licentiousness. Therefore the female gaze present here

have deeper implications to it than what appears to be mere display of either shame or

effrontery.

In another excerpt from “Satyavan Savitri”, Savitri in search of her husband,

upon finding Satyavan as a suitable match „looks at‟ him admiringly. The female gaze

in her discourse appreciates Satyavan as an attribute of manliness. She describes

Satyavan in idioms like gunvaan (“talented”), tejvaan (“glorious”), sheelvant

(“polite”), dayavaan (“merciful”), and his physicality in words like, mote nein (“large

eyes”), choda matha (“broad forehead”), lambi garden (“long neck”), sudol bhuja

(“mascular arms”), sheran si chaal (“lion like gait”), chandrma sa chehra (“moon like

face”) etc. The female gaze present here is the one as idealised/idolised by male. This

is the hegemonised gaze within conventions of mythical narrative which is black and

white- there are no greys and Satyavan is „all good‟, an aggregate of manliness.

Savitri appreciates Satyavan in terms of male normativity. In both the ragnis, the

female gaze is not that of either Meneka or Savitri rather it is what has been ascribed

113
to both of them by the composer or the poet who is himself a male. The female gaze

present here is the hegemonised gaze culturally imposed by the poet, a male. It is

actually the male gaze superimposed onto the female characters.

Endnotes

1
Cultural transition in 20th century Haryanvi society: It was a time when the rural society
witnessed and experienced a major leap towards modernity. The agro based economy slowly
moved towards the industries. The rural population began migrating towards the urban. The
younger generation, which was till now governed by patriarchy, began asserting and claiming
its individuality. Norms of kinship, marriage, reproductive rights of women, caste and
religion began to be openly questioned. Women, who till now labored either within four walls
or fields, began working outside their homes, and earning not only for their families, but also
for themselves. All these cultural transformations got reflected in the folk narratives of the
contemporary poets or folk bards. There are numerous Sangs which are replete with issues
regarding the role of men and women in a society and their resistance to each others‟
individuality.
2
Swami, Parmeshwaranand, ed. Encyclopedic Dictionary of Puranas. Vol.4. New Delhi:
Sarup & Sons. 2001. 878-79. Print. [Bibliography info]
3
Ramayana 1.63.4-14. We get an indirect reference of Meneka when saint Shantananda
narrated the legend of Vishwamitra to Rama while in his exile.
4
Mahabharata 1.7.71-72. The story of Meneka is narrated by her daughter Shakuntala when
she happens to meet king Dushyanta in the forest.
5
Mahabharata 3:46 This can be illustrated by quoting the episode of Urvashi‟s conversation
with Arjuna. Urvashi got enamored of Arjuna‟s youth and valor. She insisted on both of them
to have a sexual union which Arjuna declined stating that because of her association with
Indra (Arjuna‟s God-father), he regards her as his mother-like. Urvashi takes it as a
humiliation at her youth and beauty and curses Arjuna to be impotent for a year.
6
Many male children were born out of such unions- Drona (Bhardwaj and Ghritachi), Shuka
(Vyasa and Ghritachi), Rishyashringa (Vibhandaka/Urvashi), Kripa (Saradwat and Janapadi).
A few female children were also born from apsaras- Satyavati (wife of king Shantanu of
Hastinapur) and Kripi (wife of Drona), besides Shakuntala.
7
Read akshaya Kumar‟s paper for details.
8
The ragni, “Pooranmal”, uses the name “Nunade” for the female protagonist, but, the
researcher is going to use the popular name “Loona” in her discussion of the said character.
9
Read Frances W. Pritchett‟s “Sit Basant:” Oral Tale, “Sangit,” and “Kissa” (1983), for
detailed story of “Roop Basant”.
10
Mahabharata 3.293-297.
11
The story has been reworded and summarized from two books: Badrinath (2008) and Patil
(1983), to include only the main events. For detailed information of the two given sources,
please go to Bibliography. (Folklore in the Mahabharata; N.B. Patil 1983; Ajanta
publications; Delhi) and (The Women of Mahabharata; Chaturvedi Badrinath; Orient
Longman pvt. Ltd. 2008 Noida) [bibliographic info]
12
Read Prem Chowdhry‟s Contentious Marriages and Eloping Couples for details.
13
In the book Religions Today: An Introduction, Mary Pat Fisher argues that Snatana
Dharma had its root from the Aryan civilization which was a patriarchal race. Therefore the
norms and customs propagated by these people favoured male interests and subjugated

114
women. For details read: page 47-48; Routledge Publications, 2002, NewYork. [bibliographic
info]
14
Nakh-Shikh tradition uses metaphors effectively. Such poetry demands continuous word
play. The language of this literature is peppered with local vocabulary. The construction of
femininity is apparent in some nakh-shikh discriptions where women were represented as
symbols of power, and emerged as embodiments of all the divine and mythological attributes.
For more on nakh-shikh and riti kal poetry, read Literature, Culture and History in Mughal
North-India by Sandhya Sharma, (2011).

115
 Works Cited

Chand, Pandit Lakhmi. Pandit Lakhmi Chand Granthavali. Ed. Pooran Chand

Sharma. Panchkula: Haryana Sahitya Akademi, 1992.

Chowdhry, Prem. “Contentious Marriages, Eloping Couples: Gender, Caste, and

Patriarchy in Northern India.” New Delhi: OUP, 2007.

Deol, Jeevan. “Sex, Social Critique and the Female Figure in Premodern Punjabi

Poetry: Varis Shah‟s „Hir‟”. Modern Asian Studies. 36.1, (2002): 141-71.

Dhanpat. Dhanpat Nindana: Amritkalash. Ed. Suresh Jangid and Sheelak Ram Jangra.

Kaithal: Sukirti Prakashan, 2009.

Geetha, V. Patriarchy. Delhi: Bhatakal & Sen, 2007.

Jain, Jasbir. “Ek tha Raja, Ek thi Rani: patriarchy, religion and gender in religious

kathas”. Indian International Centre Quarterly. 31.1, (2004): 94-103.

Judge, Paramjit. S. Religion and Caste in 18th Century Punjab: A Sociological

Analysis of Heer of Warris Shah. Reconstructing Identities. Ed. Paramjit S.

Judge and Gurpreet Bal. Jaipur: Rawat Publications, 2008. Pg. 23-40.

Kumar, Akshaya. “From Spiritual to Subaltern: Shifting Semantics of “Kissa Pooran

Bhagat” in Modern Punjabi Literature”. Indian Literature. 47.2, (2003): 131-

148. Web. <http://www.jstor.org/stable/23341396>.

Saroha, Shweta. “Female Embodiment in Folklore: A Study of Ragni “Hoor

Meneka””. Indraprastha. 2.1, (2013): 151-63.

Sharma, Sandhya. Literature, Culture and History in Mughal North India 1550-1800.

Delhi: Primus Books, 2011.

116
Sullivan, Nikki. A Critical Introduction to Queer Theory. UK: Edinburgh University

Press, 2003. Web. 15 Oct. 2014.

Wadley, Susan. S. “Women and the Hindu Tradition”. Women and National

Development: The Complexities of Change. 3.1, (1977): 113-125. Web. 21

Aug. 2014. <www.jstor.com.>.

Walsh, David. “The Role of Ideology in Cultural Reproduction”. Cultural

Reproduction. Ed. Chris Jenks. London: Routledge. 1993. Web. 18 Aug. 2014.

Waterhouse, Ruth. “The Inverted Gaze”. Body Matters: Essays on the Sociology of

the Body. Ed. Sue Scott and David Morgan. USA: Tylor and Francis, 1996.

Web.

117